Evolution vs Creationism

[mmm]

It's unfair of you to continue to criticize Christianity of acts hundreds of years past

So lets pretend they never occured, huh?

No, you need to take into account the steps current Christians have taken to correct these wrongdoings. You're not acknowledging that Christians do good things now. You don't criticize Germans for being Nazis more than half a century ago, why do you Criticize Christians?

while ignoring their modern acts of kindness.

Vatican city. No further comments.

If you're referring to the allegations of child abuse, while these are horrible instances for the children involved, they are isolated in nature and only apply to a very specific subset of a subset of a global religion with millions (if not billions) more followers. Every group, every nation has a small percentage of crooked individuals who have nothing in common with the rest of their community but a nation of residence or common religion. I could call Americans fat, conservative radicals or scheming, greedy bankers. I could call Greeks tax-evading, bribe-prone fisherman. It's unfair of you to apply your stereotype to include the entirety of a good religion.

It's also spiteful that you continue to strive to tear apart every dogma of a religion that teaches tolerance and good works simply because you do not believe in it.

I critisize misogynism found in the bible, African slave trade done almost entirely by christians, the Bible's stealing at least half of its sayings from ancient religions. Not the words that teach tolerance and good works, which in fact apply in almost every religion.

How many Christians do you know today that practice slavery? Aside from the always present tiny radical proportion, Christians have accepted that slavery is no longer acceptable or moral. You're fixed on condemning what our Bible says, but continue to ignore what we strive to practice- tolerance, love, and kindness. So what if the Bible shares common ancestry with other ancient religions? Can we both not be right in saying that murder is bad?

Christianity will never be disproven; it's existed 2000 years of debate and criticism and will continue to exist.

And through those 2000 years, large parts of it were disproven. Now, the creation of the universe is being "investigated", we know that man wasnt made by sand/soil, we know how land formed as well as how the seas formed. We know how different breeds of animals formed. And of course, we know that there is no hell inside the earth.

Again, what the Bible says and what Christians believe are different things. You are taking things literally with the purpose of ridiculing our religion, not understanding it. To illustrate, the idea that there was a hell inside our Earth would have sounded strange to the early Christians, as would a heaven with clouds and harp-strumming angels. Then along comes the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, and artwork and literature of the times such as Dante's Inferno or the mural in the Sistine Chapel. People come to believe that these paintings were literal, and that there was a hell below the Earth and so on. Now we know this is false, so Christianity changed it's belief system.

Christianity changes it's beliefs to best fit current society just as a shoe is "broken in" to give the foot the best fit. For some, it is this literal, ancient religion you have described because they feel it best represent's God's word. For others, various dogmas and practices are different because it fit's their own preconceived belief system better. For example, Catholics believe that the bread and wine on the communion altar are transformed into Christ's body and blood. My particular denomination believes that the act is an act of remembrance, and that the transfiguration is symbolic rather than literal. Neither of us are more "correct" than the other, rather our particular beliefs are what give us a better religious experience.

Oh, one last thing. Tell me how many Christians worldwide actually follow the bible and how many of them show complete tolerance and no bad doings.

[quote="mmm"]Christians are humans, and humans are not perfect. Perfection is not the "point" of Christianity, yet we try to be as close to perfection as humanly possible. If this is an attempt to "prove" that Christianity is not good, I'll again refer you to the millions of dollars and volunteer hours Christianity yields for the less fortunate.

[mmm]

It's unfair of you to continue to criticize Christianity of acts hundreds of years past

So lets pretend they never occured, huh?

No, you need to take into account the steps current Christians have taken to correct these wrongdoings. You're not acknowledging that Christians do good things now. You don't criticize Germans for being Nazis more than half a century ago, why do you Criticize Christians?

while ignoring their modern acts of kindness.

Vatican city. No further comments.

If you're referring to the allegations of child abuse, while these are horrible instances for the children involved, they are isolated in nature and only apply to a very specific subset of a subset of a global religion with millions (if not billions) more followers. Every group, every nation has a small percentage of crooked individuals who have nothing in common with the rest of their community but a nation of residence or common religion. I could call Americans fat, conservative radicals or scheming, greedy bankers. I could call Greeks tax-evading, bribe-prone fisherman. It's unfair of you to apply your stereotype to include the entirety of a good religion.

It's also spiteful that you continue to strive to tear apart every dogma of a religion that teaches tolerance and good works simply because you do not believe in it.

I critisize misogynism found in the bible, African slave trade done almost entirely by christians, the Bible's stealing at least half of its sayings from ancient religions. Not the words that teach tolerance and good works, which in fact apply in almost every religion.

How many Christians do you know today that practice slavery? Aside from the always present tiny radical proportion, Christians have accepted that slavery is no longer acceptable or moral. You're fixed on condemning what our Bible says, but continue to ignore what we strive to practice- tolerance, love, and kindness. So what if the Bible shares common ancestry with other ancient religions? Can we both not be right in saying that murder is bad?

Christianity will never be disproven; it's existed 2000 years of debate and criticism and will continue to exist.

And through those 2000 years, large parts of it were disproven. Now, the creation of the universe is being "investigated", we know that man wasnt made by sand/soil, we know how land formed as well as how the seas formed. We know how different breeds of animals formed. And of course, we know that there is no hell inside the earth.

Again, what the Bible says and what Christians believe are different things. You are taking things literally with the purpose of ridiculing our religion, not understanding it. To illustrate, the idea that there was a hell inside our Earth would have sounded strange to the early Christians, as would a heaven with clouds and harp-strumming angels. Then along comes the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, and artwork and literature of the times such as Dante's Inferno or the mural in the Sistine Chapel. People come to believe that these paintings were literal, and that there was a hell below the Earth and so on. Now we know this is false, so Christianity changed it's belief system.

Christianity changes it's beliefs to best fit current society just as a shoe is "broken in" to give the foot the best fit. For some, it is this literal, ancient religion you have described because they feel it best represent's God's word. For others, various dogmas and practices are different because it fit's their own preconceived belief system better. For example, Catholics believe that the bread and wine on the communion altar are transformed into Christ's body and blood. My particular denomination believes that the act is an act of remembrance, and that the transfiguration is symbolic rather than literal. Neither of us are more "correct" than the other, rather our particular beliefs are what give us a better religious experience.

Oh, one last thing. Tell me how many Christians worldwide actually follow the bible and how many of them show complete tolerance and no bad doings.

Christians are humans, and humans are not perfect. Perfection is not the "point" of Christianity, yet we try to be as close to perfection as humanly possible. If this is an attempt to "prove" that Christianity is not good, I'll again refer you to the millions of dollars and volunteer hours Christianity yields for the less fortunate.

[Shadow00]

Yes, but you seem to miss the point. I am ok with what you believe, as long as it doesnt get in the way of science, and as long as you dont kill for religion (which is ofcourse extreme).
And you need to understand that Christianity has been getting in the way of science for centuries now, and the followers (many of them) act extreme to prevent discoveries that are not in their favor. For example, if a time machine was to be built, and scientists would like to travel to witness Jesus' miracles, do you really think that they'd be able to without having their lives threatened?
And last but not least, if you have actually dumped the bad parts of the bible, including all the contradictions, all the parts that dont fit in todays society, and keep only the few good parts, then what exactly do you have in common with Christianism? You follow 4-5 basic principles (dont kill etc) and thats about it.
And there is no need to point even that. I am sure that the non-criminal part of the world says: I would so kill my neighbour right now, but Im afraid of going to hell… or that "if i kill that guy ill go to jail".


So to get over with this, do you think science and religion are equal?
In my opinion, science has helped improve our lives, whereas religion... Well, if you were to look at its very peak, you'd see that the only invention during the time religion was in charge, was liquid fire. And that was for defence.
So, which one helps mankind the most?

[mmm]

So to get over with this, do you think science and religion are equal?
In my opinion, science has helped improve our lives, whereas religion... Well, if you were to look at its very peak, you'd see that the only invention during the time religion was in charge, was liquid fire. And that was for defence.
So, which one helps mankind the most?

I don't believe science and religion share an adversarial relationship. Besides, if you're going to measure science and religion's worth by inventions created, science is obviously going to win. I also disagree with your assertion that many followers of religion are extreme and will threaten to kill to defend their beliefs. In your example, I'd say the majority of Christians would look forward to the time machine's departure.

We also hold doctrines that do not explicitly appear in the Bible, such as the trinity or confirmation, by the way. What's the matter with having a variation on what the Bible says?

I will agree though with a slight variation of what you've been saying about extremism: extreme beliefs hinder the advancement of mankind, whether they be religious, political, moral, or otherwise.

[prophet]

Yes, but you seem to miss the point. I am ok with what you believe, as long as it doesnt get in the way of science, and as long as you dont kill for religion (which is ofcourse extreme).
And you need to understand that Christianity has been getting in the way of science for centuries now, and the followers (many of them) act extreme to prevent discoveries that are not in their favor. For example, if a time machine was to be built, and scientists would like to travel to witness Jesus' miracles, do you really think that they'd be able to without having their lives threatened?

The same could be said for atheists. sure some christian radical might threaten the life of someone to stop the use or creation of a technology that would go against their beliefs, but I am sure that a radical athiest would do the same. If a christian some how found a way to prove that Christ really existed and that all his miracles were real(which will never happen since Christianity is based on faith, not proof, otherwise everyone could get in to heaven) a radical atheist would do everything in their power to disprove it so their beliefs aren't discredited. And some science proves the Moses crossed the red sea-

My cousin couldnt finish. She had to leave ._.

[Shadow00]

Moses could cross the sea easily, as the waters there recede for a fixed time per day. He couldve known so he led some people there and they got away. That simple.

Now, you have proven facts, over faith.
For example, I believe in God, is the same as stating "I believe in unicorns". Exactly the same.

[mmm]

Moses could cross the sea easily, as the waters there recede for a fixed time per day. He couldve known so he led some people there and they got away. That simple.

Now, you have proven facts, over faith.
For example, I believe in God, is the same as stating "I believe in unicorns". Exactly the same.

I don't see any argument supporting that last assertion. You two realize there will never be a way to "win" what has become an argument, right?

[Shadow00]

Moses could cross the sea easily, as the waters there recede for a fixed time per day. He couldve known so he led some people there and they got away. That simple.

Now, you have proven facts, over faith.
For example, I believe in God, is the same as stating "I believe in unicorns". Exactly the same.

I don't see any argument supporting that last assertion. You two realize there will never be a way to "win" what has become an argument, right?

Well, both require just faith. You can believe what Jesus is said to have done, as easily as you can believe that unicorns exist.

[Gyro_Plasma]

evolution all the way

[danny]

truely disheartening to read this thread and see the almost blatant hate speech from both sides. point proven. religion vs science HINDERS EVERYTHING. take a step back people and realize that most men of science are also men of god. people should be allowed to believe freely and WITHOUT persecution. That means that BOTH SIDES have to swallow their pride and shut up. Agree to disagree and move on. this started as a mere discussion and blew up into an argument which only proves how easily ANYONE can become fanatical. MMM and shadow. i know you both to be quite intelligent and level headed, but this particular thread doesnt dignify that fact. i suggest that you both take this lesson away from this and that everyone also take this lesson. Agree to disagree and move on. Fighting over stupid crap is what has hindered progress in humanity. not religion or lack thereof.